In article , 
JN@noparticularplacetogo.com (JNugent) wrote:

> >> Any idea of the deceased councillor's position on ambulances?
> 
> > You are a sick troll!
> 
> Really? Just because I have rather obliquely made reference to 
> something about which you are quite right to be deeply embarrassed? 
> Something for which you were rightly criticised by the relevant 
> authority? Something which means you are unfit to hold public 
> office?

You are relying on an inaccurate press report and not on the decisions of 
both the Standards Board for England and the local Standards Committee. 
They accepted that I was not intending to obstruct an ambulance on an 
emergency call.

-- 
Cllr. Colin Rosenstiel
Cambridge                    http://www.rosenstiel.co.uk/
Cambridge Liberal Democrats: http://www.cambridgelibdems.org.uk/

rosenstiel@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:

> JN@noparticularplacetogo.com (JNugent) wrote:

>>>> Any idea of the deceased councillor's position on ambulances?

>>> You are a sick troll!

>> Really? Just because I have rather obliquely made reference to 
>> something about which you are quite right to be deeply embarrassed? 
>> Something for which you were rightly criticised by the relevant 
>> authority? Something which means you are unfit to hold public 
>> office?

> You are relying on an inaccurate press report and not on the decisions of 
> both the Standards Board for England and the local Standards Committee. 
> They accepted that I was not intending to obstruct an ambulance on an 
> emergency call.

Why so precise?

The Board did not exonerate you - did it?

If they did, let's have some evidence of your complete acquittal.

<drums fingers on desk>

But I'm not holding my breath...

After all, the press report is not likely to be wrong when it said:

STARTQUOTE:
"The Board found Mr Rosenstiel, who sits on Cambridge City Council, *had* 
failed to comply with the code of conduct and *brought his office into 
disrepute*.
Hazel Salisbury, Ethical Standards Officer for the Board, reported: "While I 
understand Cllr Rosenstiel's concern over the parking situation, there can be 
*no excuse for preventing such a representative from administering treatment*.
"Fortunately, the injury that Mr Austine was treating turned out not to be 
life-threatening but Councillor Rosenstiel was *not aware of that* at the time."
ENDQUOTE

[My emphasis in each instance.]

Do you see what they said there?

Contrary to what you claim, Hazel Salisbury *didn't* agree that you didn't 
know the ambulance was on an emergency call. The most they allow is that you 
weren't aware of the *lightness* of the victim's injuries.

Or alternatively, are you trying to spin the line that it's OK to obstruct 
the operations of an ambulance on an emergency call as long as you claim that 
you didn't realise it was on an emergency call? What would you say if a 
Conservative or Labour councillor had tried the same line? For shame, don't 
try an undignified wriggle along the lines "I would have supported it", 
because you wouldn't have done.

Even if you are relying on that the far-fetched "defence" you mention, you 
surely aren't claiming that you have some sort of right to obstruct 
ambulances which don't happen to be on an emergency call, are you?

When are you going to resign as a councillor?